Key result
Carotid stenting in high-risk patients with symptomatic near occlusion achieved a 92% good clinical outcome rate at six months, with no significant difference compared to stenting for stenosis without near occlusion.
Why the study?
Does carotid stenting improve outcomes in high-risk patients with symptomatic carotid near occlusion compared to those with symptomatic stenosis without near occlusion?
Cohort (n=166)
No
Does carotid stenting improve outcomes in high-risk patients with symptomatic carotid near occlusion compared to those with symptomatic stenosis without near occlusion?
Absolute Event Rate: 91.7% vs 90.7%
p-value: p=1.0
Carotid stenting in high-risk patients with symptomatic near occlusion yields similar clinical outcomes and event rates compared to stenting for symptomatic stenosis without near occlusion, though hyperperfusion remains a notable risk.
Stenting appears feasible in symptomatic near occlusion; leaves open whether it outperforms medical therapy in high-risk patients.
Management of symptomatic carotid near occlusion especially in high-risk patients is different from outcome analysis of NASCET. We evaluated outcome in high-risk patients with symptomatic near occlusion. For 48 patients with near occlusion out of 166 symptomatic high-risk patients who underwent carotid stenting, we assessed the procedural success defined as residual stenosis <30%, modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at one and six months following stenting, and the 13 cerebrovascular factors related to the outcome. Initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ≥4, 1-3 and 0 were 13, 14 and 21 patients each. We compared the outcome with patients who underwent CAS (n=118) due to symptomatic stenosis without near occlusion during the same period. Our procedural success rate was 98%. A good outcome (mRS ≤2) was achieved in 44 patients (92%) at six months. There were five events (10%) within six months, i.e. three minor strokes, one major stroke caused by hemorrhage, and one death excluding two deaths not related to stroke. Hyperperfusion (n=4) was the most common cause of events leading to two minor strokes and a major stroke. Although initial NIHSS (P = .012) was related to poor outcome (mRS >2) compared to the CAS group, there was no statistical significance between two groups in the event rate of stroke, death or restenosis. The outcome of carotid stenting in high-risk patients with symptomatic near occlusion did not reveal any difference compared with CAS. Poor outcome was related to the initial NIHSS (≥4). Hyperperfusion tended to be more commonly related to an event occurring after stenting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in Symptomatic carotid near occlusion (n=166). Carotid stenting in near occlusion vs. Carotid stenting in stenosis without near occlusion was evaluated on Good clinical outcome (mRS ≤ 2) at 6 months (p=1.0). Carotid stenting in high-risk patients with symptomatic near occlusion achieved a 92% good clinical outcome rate at six months, with no significant difference compared to stenting for stenosis without near occlusion.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: